39 replies to this topic

[Adam.Bomb]

Also from Reagan in the speech. 

Well, now, if government planning and welfare had the answer—and they've had almost 30 years of it—shouldn't we expect government to read the score to us once in a while? Shouldn't they be telling us about the decline each year in the number of people needing help? The reduction in the need for public housing? 

But the reverse is true. Each year the need grows greater; the program grows greater. We were told four years ago that 17 million people went to bed hungry each night. Well that was probably true. They were all on a diet. But now we're told that 9.3 million families in this country are poverty-stricken on the basis of earning less than 3,000 dollars a year. Welfare spending [is] 10 times greater than in the dark depths of the Depression. We're spending 45 billion dollars on welfare. Now do a little arithmetic, and you'll find that if we divided the 45 billion dollars up equally among those 9 million poor families, we'd be able to give each family 4,600 dollars a year. And this added to their present income should eliminate poverty. Direct aid to the poor, however, is only running only about 600 dollars per family. It would seem that someplace there must be some overhead. 

[SirMoo]

You all sit in here making blatant justifications for all out statism and socialism, funny thing is you have NO IDEA what your are asking for. You are part of the most entitled WHINY generation out there, I am as well, we are always the victims. Why? Why does our generation have to be such POS!

 

I know very well what I'm asking for. A system that is comparable to other countries that on an economic level as the US. This is not difficult, and it's certainly not socialism. Americas right ignorantly, much like yourself, confuse social responsibility for socialism. They're not the same. 

 

Second, our generation has been financially and economically raped by the generation of our parents and grandparents. Our grandparents live in the most entitled generation, not us. We actually get nothing. Nothing. They put very little into the system and now want us to fund them through old age while providing for massive inflation brought on by bad planning and war mongering. 

 

What does my generation get? Well... Potentially nothing. Social security will have to have an pretty good injection of funds for it to survive. Realistic Health Care is only now being a reality as previously it's been too expensive for most under 30. Education leads to debt that generally doesn't get paid within in a decade.

 

These are not issues that our parents and grand parents had to deal with.

 

We're not entitled. We're simply shaping the country how we want it to be stable for us and our kids.

[Adam.Bomb]

Remember that I am also part if this generation. And Moo, you could not possibly be criticizing the oh so holy social security, the only ponzi scheme that has the SEC sucking its big money hemorrhaging dick. You, a liberal, could not possibly be against that. I will quote senator Hillary Indictment Clinton on this one "You are waging a war on our seniors." No but seriously could not agree more with you there, social security is BS. Maybe perhaps the over 100 trillion dollars in unfunded liabilities and almost 19 trillion dollars in accumulated debt should be your concern when it comes to our children! Not your crunk of s*** "social responsibility" that got us here in the first place. As Reagan said if your programs worked we would expand them and adopt more of them the bottom line is they don't! Look at the black demographic before and after the great society/affirmative action. DemocRATS got the absolute opposite of their supposed intentions (even though what they got was their intention) black communities went to absolute s*** and  the black family is all but extinct at this point (when in 50s and 60s it was very very strong). The policies of the liberals are only intended to expand the state, and make people more dependent on it. Period. Bottom line. End of story.

[SirMoo]

Remember that I am also part if this generation. And Moo, you could not possibly be criticizing the oh so holy social security, the only ponzi scheme that has the SEC sucking its big money hemorrhaging dick. You, a liberal, could not possibly be against that. I will quote senator Hillary Indictment Clinton on this one "You are waging a war on our seniors." No but seriously could not agree more with you there, social security is BS. Maybe perhaps the over 100 trillion dollars in unfunded liabilities and almost 19 trillion dollars in accumulated debt should be your concern when it comes to our children! Not your crunk of s*** "social responsibility" that got us here in the first place. As Reagan said if your programs worked we would expand them and adopt more of them the bottom line is they don't! Look at the black demographic before and after the great society/affirmative action. DemocRATS got the absolute opposite of their supposed intentions (even though what they got was their intention) black communities went to absolute s*** and  the black family is all but extinct at this point (when in 50s and 60s it was very very strong). The policies of the liberals are only intended to expand the state, and make people more dependent on it. Period. Bottom line. End of story.

Your ramblings make no sense and make you look crazy. It's incoherent how you jump between things that are not even related.

 

I think very few people disagree that Social Security needs to be reworked. Bed Medicare/caid is included in this program. However, to claim it's a ponzi scheme with sincerity means you know either nothing about a ponzi scheme, nothing about Social Security, or, and most likely, both the above. Social Security can and has funded itself when the money coming in was higher than the money going out. It does this by giving the Federal Government bonds to which they pay interest on which goes back into the system. This is not something a ponzi does. Please read up.

 

Modifying the SSA to expand Medicare, and improve quality of life while providing more money to it would be the best step the US has taken for social welfare.

 

But what I find most amazing about your insane ramblings is that you manage to make it racist.

 

Reagan was a terrible president. He was corrupt and had little care for the people. His policies would destroy the American Lower and Middle class by strangling them out of any sort of economical stability. His policies have proven time and time again to be absurd. He was a silly warmonger who use others as escape goats for his corruption. His policies have lead to some of the highest arrest rates among minorities for drug convictions. The stupidity of his war on drugs is astounding.

 

Also... When you talk about debt. You're pretending that there is a bill collector who can just ask us to pay up... It shows you know nothing of what you speak about and use big scary numbers as a fear mongering tactic instead of the reality of how the system actually works.

[Adam.Bomb]

The way to pay off the debt is to decrease our deficits. We wouldnt have our debt issue if we were fiscally responsible to begin with (namely under our last 5 presidents), and I am aware that includes my beloved Reagan and other presidents. There are fiscal issues on both sides, namely for republicans it is contributing their surplus into defense.There is some good literature on how Reagan could have payed off our national debt in the 80s if he wasn't such a hawk. Also Social security is a ponzi scheme, as the government has not maintained its promises, there will come a point soon where people won't get back what they put in (their own money). This would be because of the fraudulent bond taking by our government, and our unfunded liabilities will be too great. THE SYSTEM IS BANKRUPT, and the government knows it and is lying to us PONZI by definition. Just like I pointed out in the president thread it is not sustainable Greece, Italy, Spain, France, and in a few years Sweden will be and are examples of this.  Plus what I said was not at all racist it was actually complete fact, look up black family legitimacy. In addition to address your medicare medicaid comments, soon very soon that system will look much like social security does now, bound to go under. You may find me incoherent, but I am far more educated on the matter than most of our generation. In fact, I can say that I am right with confidence. Let the Euro zone, elementary economics, and history in general speak for themselves. There is sustainable systems and unsustainable systems, as of right now we find our self in a unsustainable system.

[Adam.Bomb]

Also to state what you avoided again. If the policies worked we would be more inclined to expand them and implement more. We have had almost 60 years of this, IT IS NOT WORKING. In fact in many cases, as I pointed out with the black community, it does the exact opposite of what it was meant to do.

[SirMoo]

Also to state what you avoided again. If the policies worked we would be more inclined to expand them and implement more.

I chose to ignore it because it's so inaccurate and absurd it didn't need to be addressed. The policies do work until those who wish to destroy them adopt poison-pill-esque riders. The systems work until those who try to destroy them put stipulations on them that bring them down to to a halt. The GOP has been trying to do this with any sort of social policy, adding bull**** to it to destroy it and make it inefficient where it can't function then go 'SEE! SEE! TOLD YOU IT WON'T WORK' - It's not that it didn't work. It's simply sabotaged. This is basic politics.

 

The Social Security Act has constantly been expanded... Kind of shows that it works.

 

You claim to be far more educated. But you're mostly spewing tea party propaganda that is either factually incorrect, obvious hyperbole, bull**** logical fallacy rhetoric, or simply mindless non-sense. You can't back up anything you're saying. Until you can find a fact and stop quoting a criminal...

[Adam.Bomb]

I want to point out I am not resorting to personal attacks, and you are. Ok. I have facts on the president forum and it seems everyone runs off when I drop a U>n report showing how s***ty the euro-zone really is. Also I am a libertarian and I'm sure if we sat down and talked about thing we could find common ground. So if I am entirely aloof and ignorant you should feel and for agreeing with me on anything. Plus your justification for liberal policy failures is frankly hilarious.  For example, after democrats swept the house and senate in 2006, everyone knew the danger of the governmental housing assistance programs and NINJA loans. In addition everyone knew that wall street had criminally taken advantage of the situation (sure you agree with me there). So republicans being the voice of reason asked for unilateral reforms of the program, and transfers of most of its users to section 8 (which even this point is practically hemorrhaging money uselessly now). Democrats whined and whined, RACIST bleh bleh bleh, EVERONE DESERVES HOUSING bleh bleh bleh bleh. And then little do you know the program CLINTON implemented went to s***, then also the housing market, and then almost the entirety of the world economy.  So you can throw s*** at the wall and try to make it stick, but in the case of all these programs republicans have been the ones trying to help NOT DEMOCRATS.

[SirMoo]

 

Ok. I have facts on the president forum and it seems everyone runs off when I drop a U>n report showing how s***ty the euro-zone really is.

This isn't there and is irrelevant. 

 

Also I am a libertarian and I'm sure if we sat down and talked about thing we could find common ground

Doubt ful. That doesn't mean you're good at finding common ground. It's means your good at pretending social problems will stop existing if the government just ignores them long enough.

 

For example, after democrats swept the house and senate in 2006, everyone knew the danger of the governmental housing assistance programs and NINJA loans. In addition everyone knew that wall street had criminally taken advantage of the situation (sure you agree with me there).

Once more irrelevant. You can't seem to talk about ONE thing for more than one sentence. You jump around from topics like a mad man. This is not a disccsion, or debate. This is the rantings on part with an old crazy man telling kids to get off his lawn.

 

I'm not going to address any of your points in detail till you get back to the core of your issue in the first place. You've stopped making this about social issues and started bitching about democrats. Learn to control your thoughts and present yourself in a manner people can understand what the hell you're talking about.

[Adam.Bomb]

I was obviosuly talking about the liberal response to the housing crisis Vs. the conservative one. Maybe you should learn to read.

[Stevphfeniey]

I was obviosuly talking about the liberal response to the housing crisis Vs. the conservative one. Maybe you should learn to read.

 

Hi, person with background in urban planning here. Federal government doesn't really have a hand in housing, that's up to city governments. Now if you're talking about the economy tanking because of the subprime mortgage crisis in 08, you can thank the GOP congress under Clinton for that.

[Adam.Bomb]

You can thank Clinton A DEMOCRAT for supporting what eventually caused the crisis, along with all your "everyone deserves a loan" democRATS in congress. They refused to reform the program knowing it was a ticking time bomb.

[Hake.]

You can thank Clinton A DEMOCRAT for supporting what eventually caused the crisis, along with all your "everyone deserves a loan" democRATS in congress. They refused to reform the program knowing it was a ticking time bomb.

If only there was a credible independent seeking election who wouldn't do this *cough* *cough* .

[Adam.Bomb]

Yep Hake. Its all politics Democrats knew they had a sweeping election coming up, they couldn't let their (mostly) handout dependent constituents see them nab such a large program. So they resisted so they could sweep congress in 2006 and 2008 (blaming the recession on republicans who tried to stop it), that was more important to them than the American economy. Everyone blames wall street, rich people, and capitalism for the recession (they did have a part to play) but in all reality if Democrats wouldn't of played politics and nabbed the program NONE OF IT WOULD HAVE HAPPENED. Its people like Stev who think a homeless man should be able to get a house loan that caused the 2008 recession.

[Hake.]

The irony is not lost here...

[Stevphfeniey]

I'm so glad children like you don't get to vote. I remember being 13 and conservative.

[Adam.Bomb]

Everything led up to 2005-2006 when it came to the sub-prime mortgage crisis. Everyone knew what the republicans were proposing would fix the problem, but democrats INSISTED that everyone who had the loans deserved them. This was their way of playing politics and leaving the American job market and share holders FOR DEAD.

[Adam.Bomb]

I'm so glad children like you don't get to vote. I remember being 13 and conservative.

And I will be voting very soon intact i am just a few days off of 2016s primary. Its ok though the republican candidate is winning my state anyways. 

[Stevphfeniey]

Adam you seem to be under the impression that all Democrats are power hungry socialists bent on putting us into an economic depression, and that all Republicans are pro-business, pro-freedom champions of the American people. This is an extremely simplistic and, frankly, childish way of looking at the political landscape in Washington.

There are pro-business, pro-life Democrats out there, and there are Republicans who think that the social safety net can be more effective. Even I applaud the work ethic of Paul Ryan, despite my not agreeing with him.

But you're clearly not understanding the entire picture here, the very specific and well documented chain of events that lead us to having a system that threw us overboard 30 years ago. You're not understanding that really on the issue of the economy, Republicans and Democrats really aren't that different. You're not understanding that no matter what side of the aisle a politician is on, they're all up for the highest bidder. If you want to truly understand why a politician does what they do, just follow the money.

That's why I support Bernie Sanders, because it's easy to follow the money with him. None of it leads to Wall Street, it leads back to over 2 million Americans.

Im going to leave you with a very simple, but powerful quote from an inspirational man, then I'm leaving because clearly you've not done your homework.

"This country has socialism for the rich, rugged individualism for the poor."

[Adam.Bomb]

Stev I understand your misconception about me I might not have expressed how I really feel enough. I HATE THE GOP. The party is weak, spineless, misplaced, caved to special interests, and overall corrupt. That being said I hate the DNC more. Now, I do support a safety net so that is misconception number 2, but unlike you I AM PRACTICAL (could run most of Europe better than they do themselves) its needs to be FRUGAL. The solution to the influence of special interests is term limits and campaign finance laws. I respect you as you are a concerned citizen, a CRUCIAL part of a republic, but you have given in to the the victim culture of the Democrats and company. The real solution to poverty is breaking the cycle, not by shitting money into impoverished areas. We have tried to break it by that since the 60s it doesn't work, in fact it MAKES IT WORSE just look at black family legitimacy rate and incarceration rates. (before and after affirmative action and great society.) I better not hear the war on drugs argument in here, and even if you pull that s*** out of your ass its still a matter of choices. Like I said HARD WORK and CHOICES. We need to bring America back, the solution to economic inequity is a change in MINDSET and CULTURE, a grassroots awakening in this country where we stop being whining POS.